Saturday, February 28, 2015

I've written previously that I don’t believe media bias is always nefarious, or even intentional. Just as a fish doesn’t swim around all day wondering how he can manage to stay wet, reporters don’t wake up every day asking themselves how they can stick it to conservatives. A fish doesn’t realize he’s wet, and many journalists don’t realize that their J-school training and subsequent existence in a center-left newsroom bubble have conditioned them to construct narrative frameworks one way and not another.

On a tie vote, the House Common Education Committee turned down a measure to require private schools receiving public money to comply with the same financial reporting mandates as public schools.

Author Katie Henke, R-Tulsa, said her bill would “level the playing field.”

“If you take public dollars, you have to play by the same rules (as public schools),” Henke said.

Currently, the bill would only apply to the approximately 400 recipients of the Lindsey Nicole Henry scholarship program for children with special needs. In view of pending Senate legislation paving the way for school vouchers, however, the issue could have much broader implications.

School choice advocates attacked Henke’s bill, saying it would undercut private schools by making them comply with the same financial reporting as public schools.

“The reason private schools work so well, and they do work well; and the reason home schooling works so well, and it does work well, is that they are free,” said Rep. Chuck Strohm, R-Jenks. “They are living the American Dream free of the shackles public schools are required to operate under.”

Strohm, who received substantial support from a school choice group in last year’s election, said private schools should not be subject to requirements as public schools because private school parents are “more engaged” and “know what’s going on” in their schools.

Most of the parents in Rep. Strohm’s legislative district send their children to public schools. They were perhaps insulted to learn that their representative said private-school parents are more engaged than public-school parents.

State Rep. Chuck Strohm

As it turns out, Rep. Strohm didn't say that. “I can tell you private school parents are very engaged,” Rep. Strohm actually said. “I won’t say that they are more engaged than public school parents [emphasis added], but I would say that the parents in private schools are extremely engaged.”

Two more quick observations on the story. First, Mr. Krehbiel mentioned “pending Senate legislation paving the way for school vouchers.” In reality, the pending legislation creates education savings accounts (ESAs). Now granted, various private-school-choice policy mechanisms (vouchers, tax-credit scholarships, ESAs, individual tax credits, and so on) have much in common. And I do understand the challenge of writing for a general audience, especially on deadline. Sometimes it’s easier to use a shorthand term rather than to get bogged down in technicalities. Still, I think readers deserve more clarity. A reporter can certainly explain that ESAs are similar to vouchers, but he should call them ESAs.

Second, Mr. Krehbiel reports that Rep. Strohm “received substantial support from a school choice group in last year’s election.” True enough, and relevant to the story. But why no mention of where Rep. Henke or the bill’s other supporters received their support? Why is one relevant and not the other?

Even though the Tulsa World endorsed Rep. Strohm’s opponent, I am proceeding on the assumption that Mr. Krehbiel was doing his best to be fair. (That has been OCPA's experience with him in the past.) And if that’s not the case, it’s likely to backfire anyway. Just as lefty reporters’ ham-fisted gotcha journalism has helped propel Scott Walker to the top of the GOP presidential field, Rep. Strohm probably doesn’t mind being mentioned in the same story with vouchers, given that likely voters in the Tulsa metro favor them by a margin of 56 percent to 43 percent (according to the Tulsa World’s own pollster).

Accountability?

But enough about the journalism. Let’s look at the merits of the policy argument that private schools receiving public dollars need to be accountable just as public schools are accountable. Patrick McGuigan, who teaches at a public charter school in Oklahoma City, observes:

Eddie Evans of Youth Services of Tulsa recently remarked, “We’ve got kids in 11th and 12th grade who can't read at a third-grade level. How’d they get there?" Rev. Donald Tyler, an African-American preacher in Tulsa, is also on record saying “I have kids in my church who have graduated who can't read.”

McGuigan asks: In what sense are public schools “accountable”? Have the ineffective Tulsa teachers and administrators been fired? Have taxpayers gotten their money back? When this educational malpractice continues year after year, how can people continue to claim with a straight face that public schools are “accountable”? Policymakers need to face the hard truth that "rules" and "regulations" are not synonymous with "accountability."

Private schools participating in school-choice programs are already subject to certain forms of bureaucratic accountability. But is this necessary? Dr. Jay P. Greene (Ph.D. in political science, Harvard University) argues that “the oft-repeated claim that state funding requires accountability to the state is an obviously shallow and false political slogan rather than a well-considered policy view.” After all,

Most state-funded programs require no formal accountability to the state and instead rely primarily on the self-interest of the recipients to use the funds wisely. For example, the largest domestic program, social security, is designed to prevent seniors from lacking basic resources for housing, food, or clothing. But we don’t demand that seniors account for the use of their social security checks. They could blow it at the casino if they want. We’re just counting on the fact that most would have the good sense to make sure that their basic needs are covered first.

Even in the area of education, most government programs require no formal accountability. Pell Grants, Stafford Loans, and the Daycare Tuition Tax Credit do not require state testing for people using those funds. We just trust that the public purpose of subsidizing education will be served by people pursuing their own interests. Anyone who declares that state funding requires state accountability obviously hasn’t thought about this for more than 10 seconds.

I’m often told that conservatives are running the legislative and executive branches of Oklahoma’s government. If that's true, and if they want all schools to “play by the same rules,” wouldn’t the conservative instinct be to eliminate rules for public schools rather than to add rules for private schools? If the goal is to level the playing field, then let’s free the public schools from their shackles.

In The Journal Record, OCPA president Michael Carnuccio says the Oklahoma City school superintendent doesn’t understand what real courage looks like, and OCPA distinguished fellow Andrew Spiropoulos says the city’s leaders need to teach Mr. Neu the political facts of life.

If public schools lose 60 students total because of a school choice program, the education establishment declares the sky is falling. But Oklahoma public schools lose 60 students every day as dropouts, at an annual cost to taxpayers of $800 million.

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

Tyler Bridges, the assistant superintendent of the Clinton Public Schools, recently penned some thoughtful questions about how school choice policies might evolve in Oklahoma (“My Top 10 Unanswered #schoolchoice Questions”). As an individual working for an organization administering two school-choice programs in Florida (and as a former OCPA research assistant), I thought I might take a stab at answering his questions. I’m not here to write about the “right way” to design school choice policies, but I can explain what occurs in Florida and in some other states.

1. Will private schools be mandated to accept all students if said school so chooses to accept vouchers at their respective site?

Some people get worried about private schools “not accepting all students,” but they forget the vast majority of public schools are free to reject students not living within their attendance zones. Magnet schools and programs for the gifted are also free to reject students based on academic ability or talent. It’s worth noting that the prestigious Oklahoma School of Science and Mathematics, a public school, only accepts a quarter of the applicants.

Louisiana takes away admissions policies from private schools participating in a voucher program. Louisiana requires participating schools to accept students through a state-run lottery system. This policy may have contributed to the very low participation rate among private schools (note: fewer than one-third of private schools participate in Louisiana, compared to more than two-thirds in Florida). Additionally, some (myself included) have speculated that the low participation rate is a contributor to the state’s uniquely poor performance among voucher schools. 2. Are students that bounce back-and-forth going to be monitored? By whom? How often?

Low-income and undocumented students already migrate back and forth between schools all the time. Hopefully Oklahoma already monitors students who switch schools and, if so, hopefully it will continue to monitor students who switch education sectors as well.

3. Are vouchers prorated in their ESA if a student stays one month and then transfers back to their original public school?

Here in Florida the payments to private schools are set quarterly, but you could set the policy so the payments are monthly. With Florida’s education savings account program, unspent money does revert to the state if the child returns to the public school. This money is made available to students on the waiting list, as the program is open on a rolling-application basis.

4. Would the private school refund tuition to the state if they did so choose to return to public school?

Again, that is all determined by the policies created by the state. Typically the private schools keep the payment for that quarter (or the month), just like many public schools.

5. Could a student enroll at a public school after coming from a private school, get the voucher and then transfer back out? Is there a timetable in place to not allow this to happen?

Most programs allow kids to switch freely among private schools with the scholarship. If a student returns to a public school in Florida, we award the remaining scholarship money to a student on the waiting list. The student would need to then reapply for a scholarship if they wanted to attend a private school again.

6. If someone chooses to simply start up a private school, what regulations do they have, if any?

This varies from state to state, but every state has regulations for private schools. Almost every state requires schools to meet local zoning, safety, and fire codes and be open for inspection. Some states have requirements for insurance or surety bonds as well. Many states also require background checks for founders and teachers to ensure there aren’t any felonies or a history of child abuse. States often require private school teachers to at least have a college degree. Education or administrative licenses are not always required (it is likely those requirements don’t provide any value added).

7. Can someone choose to start a private school, accept public dollars for a few years and then when business is bad simply close the doors?

Yes. That isn’t a bad thing. Keeping an unpopular school open would be bad for students and taxpayers alike. Likewise, districts should also be closing down unpopular public schools.

8. Must a private school be owned or sponsored by a local organization to accept vouchers? Facility and staffing requirements?

Every private school is owned by someone or something. They are all incorporated under their respective state laws. This means they have reporting requirements to the Secretary of State and often the Department of Revenue, as well as annual incorporation fees due to the state. Incorporation requires forming boards, creating bylaws, and hosting board meetings. The majority of private schools end up incorporating as nonprofits.

Facilities are required to meet local building and fire and safety codes and schools are subject to inspection. This is standard for private schools in most states already. Finally, let the private schools do their own hiring for staff. No requirements are needed here other than a background checks, or public disclosure of educational attainment of teachers, which are often required of private schools anyway.

9. Will all accountability measures (Audit requirements, RSA, A-F, TLE, testing, etc) currently asked of public schools be transferred to private institutions if/when they choose to accept public funds?

Here in Florida, private schools are required to submit financial audits if they receive $250,000 or more in scholarships (about 48 students). Florida also requires private schools to provide state-approved national norm-referenced tests to scholarship students.

I think this is a nice balance as many private schools already give national norm-referenced tests to their students. This allows private schools to retain independence in selecting tests (and curriculum) while also not outing the low-income students enrolled in the school (they aren’t pulled out of class to take a state test no other student in the school is taking).

By contrast, students in Louisiana must take the state test and private schools are subjected to the same A-F grades as public schools. Unlike public schools, the private schools in Louisiana can be denied future students. These rules are likely strong contributors the state’s previously mentioned low participation rate among private schools and may be a reason for the program’s relatively low performance.

This survey is a good barometer for how private schools in Louisiana, Indiana, and Florida feel about these regulations.

10. Will private schools accepting public funds be visited by Regional Accreditation Officers from the SDE to ensure compliance?

Again, that is up to the state. The Florida Department of Education is allowed to drop in and visit schools and ensure compliance with rules. Private schools are required to respond to DOE requests for information (like for safety plans, inspection documentation, audits, and background checks). Schools can have their eligibility pulled if they fail to do so.

As far as accreditation is concerned, most states allow private schools to seek their own accreditation through an approved third-party organization. Accreditation is not always required, and that isn’t a bad thing either (I’m doubtful accreditation adds any extra value either).

Bonus Round! (suggested by a well-informed colleague) Will public schools be allowed to require parents to pay for days taught or services not fully funded by the state (ACE, RSA, etc) due to not being serviced at a private institution?

If I’m understanding your bonus question correctly, you’re wondering what should happen if a student returns to a public school far behind his or her peers. Who should pay to catch the student up?

David Figlio at Northwestern University found that children entering private schools through Florida’s tax credit scholarship program are behind their eligible peers who remain in public schools. Should public schools be required to pay private schools then?

The answer is no to your bonus question and mine. Here’s why.

Figlio also found that the students who returned to public schools were behind the students that kept their scholarships. Figlio concludes, “the evidence strongly points to an explanation that the poor apparent FCAT performance of FTC program returnees is actually a result of the fact that the returning students are generally particularly struggling students.”

What Figlio discovered was that struggling students switch schools in the hopes of finding something that works. That is why they first chose a private school and, when that school didn’t work, returned to a public or charter school.

Children learn in different ways. That is why providing many educational opportunities allows us to improve the student’s chances of finding a school where they can excel.

[Former OCPA research assistant Patrick Gibbons (M.A. in political science, University of Oklahoma) is the public affairs manager at Step Up for Students, an organization providing scholarships for low-income and special-needs schoolchildren in Florida. A former schoolteacher, Gibbons also serves as a research fellow for the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice.]

Monday, February 23, 2015

Andrew C. Spiropoulos, who serves as the Robert S. Kerr, Sr. Professor of Constitutional Law at the Oklahoma City University School of Law, recently answered the objection raised by some ESA opponents that our state constitution requires that education funding go to districts rather than to students.

Comes now the objection that it may be illegal to divert 1017 money, Commissioners of the Land Office funds, or other statutorily created funding sources to ESAs. Prof. Spiropoulos says "there is no merit to these objections."

First, the HB 1017 fund is a statutory fund that can be modified by the legislature at any time. The same thing is true with any fund created by statute. The general rule is that if a later statute conflicts with a previously enacted one, the later prevails. In any event, there is no problem because the the HB 1017 fund consists of less than 30 percent of the money appropriated for common education. The ESA funding can come from the bulk of the agency budget funded by general revenues. The same point answers the Land Office funds questions. These funds make up a tiny percentage of the money appropriated to common education. None of that money need be touched.

Sunday, February 22, 2015

The public school system is failing our children, Montague Alcorn of Meeker writes in an excellent letter to the editor published today in The Oklahoman.

Private school students have a lower dropout rate and score higher on all standardized tests than do public school students. While there are some good individual public schools, the system itself is in need of drastic repair.

[A previous letter writer] seems not to be opposed to private schools, only “religious” private schools, and because of this disdain for religion, he feels our children should stay in a failing system. It would only take a few minutes observing the uncontrolled chaos of a public school with the serene atmosphere of a private school for him to understand the difference of philosophies between these types of schools. Private school goals are to develop children socially and academically while maintaining personal responsibility. Public schools’ goals seem to be lowering standards, increasing administration costs and appeasing the teachers unions.

Our tax money should be spent on the best product available. There’s a reason families with the means send their children to private schools, religious or not. It’s because of the excellent education and guidance their children will receive. It’s time to allow families that don’t have the means the same opportunity for their children.

Saturday, February 21, 2015

Ardmore police are investigating a high-school hazing incident, Joleen Chaney reports for News 9, and "the mother of one of the alleged victims said what happened is violent and life changing." Some Ardmore parents described it as "a grotesque and ghastly hazing initiation that was sexual in nature and horribly traumatic."

"It's been a nightmare you can't wake up from," said the mother of an alleged victim. The nightmare she said happened Wednesday on school property, and involved baseball players at the high school. ... Details of the assault are not being released, but one accusation claimed a broom handle was used to assault one of the victims. However, police would not confirm that.

"I want some kind of justice, because this should never have happened in the school system," the alleged victim's mother said. "Because we send our kids to school, and we're thinking they're safe, but they're not. Nobody protected my child, and he's going to have to live with it for the rest of his life."

Two of four Westmoore High School students accused in the gang rape of a 15-year-old student have been charged with assaulting the same girl on other occasions," The Oklahomanreports. One of the 18-year-old students "assaulted the girl at Westmoore High School by luring her into a classroom and then aggressively putting his hand up her skirt. The assault was recorded on surveillance video, documents show."

Friday, February 20, 2015

Lawmakers in the one of the reddest states in the nation are finally getting around to emulating the courageous purple-state Gov. Scott Walker.

"On Wednesday," my colleague Dave Bond reports, "House Bill 1749 was approved by the Oklahoma House of Representatives on a 59-39 vote. The bill, authored by Rep. Tom Newell, would protect taxpayers by taking state government out of the business of collecting membership dues for government labor unions that collectively bargain with state agencies or school districts. This resembles reforms enacted in Wisconsin by Gov. Scott Walker. HB 1749 now goes to the Senate for consideration."

My colleague Trent England has explained why this reform is important (and why FDR himself would approve), and today in The Journal Record OCPA president Michael Carnuccio says this separation of unions and state is long overdue.

As readers of this blog know, Oklahoma's powerful iron triangle sturdily resists parental choice. The Oklahoma Education Association is represented on one side of that triangle. With 22,307 members, the OEA has already lost one-fifth of its membership over the last 10 years. If HB 1749 becomes law and teachers have to start writing their own checks, that decline likely will accelerate.

The House roll call is here. Of particular interest (and deserving particular thanks) are five lawmakers with education backgrounds who voted for the measure: Dennis Casey, Ann Coody, Katie Henke, Jadine Nollan, and Earl Sears.

Staring at a budget gap exceeding $600 million, Oklahoma policymakers need to find "policy reforms that will both improve services and save money," my OCPA colleague Andrew Spiropoulos wrote yesterday in The Journal Record. "At the top of the list should be the establishment of education savings accounts, a version of which passed through a Senate committee this week."

The idea behind ESAs is simple, but powerful. A family whose child currently attends public school decides that the child’s education will be improved if it chooses another option. Upon being notified of the family’s choice, the state will deposit a portion of the state money allocated to the child’s education into an ESA. This amount will vary depending upon the family’s income, but under no circumstances will it be the child’s full allocation. In other words, the public education system will retain, in one version, at least 10 percent or as much as 30 percent of the child’s allocation. The child will be educated elsewhere, but a large chunk of the cash stays with public schools.

Most importantly, families can use their ESA funds to pay for education services tailored to the particular needs of their children.

If your principal concern is freeing up money for the public schools, you should be first in line to support ESAs.

The state's largest newspaper did an excellent job on Sunday debunking some common myths about education savings accounts. Still, other myths persist. For example, some ESA opponents make the claim that Article 13, section 1(a) of the state constitution requires that education funding go to districts, not to students. Thus, a bill like SB 609 by state Sen. Clark Jolley (R-Edmond) is unconstitutional.

In truth, that argument is based on a misreading of the provision, according to Andrew C. Spiropoulos, the Robert S. Kerr, Sr. Professor of Constitutional Law at the Oklahoma City University School of Law. Spiropoulos explains:

This provision requires the legislature to provide a specified minimum level of funding for public schools but does not require that all education funding go through districts. In addition, both the text of the provision itself and the Supreme Court's repeated rulings regarding education funding make clear that the legislature has the discretion to decide how and (as long as it is above the bare minimum specified) at what level to fund education. In short, there is nothing in this provision that even poses a question about the constitutionality of SB 609.

The Cato Institute maintains a public school battle map featuring news accounts of conflicts over curriculum, moral values, human origins, sexuality, and more.

We’re often told that public education is "the cornerstone of a democratic society," as the Oklahoma Education Association puts it. Public schooling brings together people of disparate backgrounds and helps create social harmony. In reality, however, "rather than bringing people together, public schooling often forces people of disparate backgrounds and beliefs into political combat," education scholar Neal McCluskey points out.

Oklahoma’s current dust-up over AP history is but the latest example. "To end the fighting caused by state-run schooling," McCluskey says, "we should transform our system from one in which government establishes and controls schools, to one in which individual parents are empowered to select schools that share their moral values and educational goals for their children."

Wednesday, February 18, 2015

"A small test is being conducted in North Carolina that could prove to be a model for national success," David N. Bass writes. "Located in Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill metro region, Thales Academy is a K-12 college preparatory private school that is tearing down the private-school cost barrier."

What lessons does Thales Academy have to teach us? One of the key takeaways is that a mixture of high-quality instruction with a low-cost, no-frills mentality is a recipe that parents are flocking to. It’s also one that draws heated opposition from liberals, who fear that parental choice will threaten their stranglehold on the education bureaucracy.

Yesterday I visited a school in the Crooked Oak school district, where I noticed this sign. Now I realize that people make mistakes. Totally understandable. But this is in a school, where presumably several educators see it every week. Let's hope they get this corrected.

Saturday, February 14, 2015

"State Sen. Kyle Loveless, R-Oklahoma City, deserves credit for seeking to reduce the chance for sexual predators to obtain jobs in public schools," The Oklahomaneditorializes today.

In some instances where a school employee is accused of preying on students, Loveless says those employees are currently allowed to resign without being prosecuted, often out of deference to the wishes of the victim’s family. Yet the lack of prosecution leaves these predators free to obtain employment at other districts that may be unaware of the prior conduct. Senate Bill 301, by Loveless, would require local school boards to notify the State Board of Education when an employee is fired or resigns while under investigation for violating the law. That notification would then allow the state board to revoke the individual’s teaching license and end the potential for a sexual predator to victimize children at other schools. That’s a sensible proposal that should enjoy bipartisan support.

Wednesday, February 11, 2015

[Guest post by Erin Goodridge, a music and art teacher at Oklahoma Virtual Charter Academy. Below is the text of a letter Mrs. Goodridge distributed to lawmakers at the state capitol today following a successful rally hosted by PublicSchoolOptions.org.]

Parents, teachers, and students gathered today near the south steps of the Oklahoma state capitol building to show their support for parental choice.

These folks from Independence Charter Middle School in Oklahoma City cheerfully proclaim that they trust parents. (Sadly, not everyone shares that view.)

I am writing this letter to thank you for the opportunity that school choice has offered me as an educator, a parent, and a citizen. This is my first year with Oklahoma Virtual Charter Academy, and it has been a both a rewarding and a life-changing experience for me.

I taught in brick-and-mortar schools for 13 years as a music and art educator. I have a passion for teaching and inspiring young minds in the arts. Last year, my husband and I were blessed with our first child, a baby girl. I was torn between my desire to continue my career as an educator and my desire to stay home and raise my daughter. My husband and I both need to work to adequately provide for our family. Reluctantly, I took a leave of absence from my school district and searched for other options.

Last summer, as I searched for alternate job opportunities, I discovered OVCA and K12. The concept of teaching online from home intrigued me, so I applied. It seemed too good to be true: I could raise my daughter at home and continue my career as a teacher? I was hired as OVCA’s middle school art and music teacher. My job at OVCA has been an answer to my prayers and has allowed my husband and I to raise our daughter at home. I am also able to further my career as an arts educator and stay current through professional development opportunities. We also have saved a considerable amount of money since there is no need for my daughter to be enrolled in daycare. School choice has given me the ability to do two things that are incredibly important to me: be a stay-at-home mom and continue my career in education! I had never thought it possible before now.

Thank you for making it possible for people like me to follow my dreams. I hope you will continue to allow school choice to be an important part of education in Oklahoma. It has made such a difference for our family.

Tuesday, February 10, 2015

Harvard University professor Paul E. Peterson has pointed out that stakeholders are "powerful interests that have a stake in the status quo." Unsurprisingly, "stakeholders resist ideas that threaten their perquisites and their privileges." I was reminded of that today upon learning that various "stakeholder groups" are in Oklahoma City today and tomorrow for a "capacity review" of the State Department of Education (OSDE). According to OSDE, the review includes representatives from various stakeholder groups, including:

A couple of token non-clunkers in there, but overall: Whew. You just shake your head.

Many of us reject the status quo, preferring instead to "design our school operations around the principle of universal school choice," as former U.S. Secretary of Education Rod Paige said yesterday. We want to "completely remove the power of government to dictate where a child attends school." We still have our work cut out for us.

Educational Choice in a Nutshell

The end goal of “public education” is an educated public. There are many different means to an end. Educational choice refers to any policy that allows parents to choose the safest and best schools for their children, whether those schools are government-operated or privately operated.

In a free society, the government rightly defers to parents when it comes to raising their children. And since education is simply a subset of parenting, the government should defer to parents when it comes to educating their children. Parents, not government officials, have the moral right to determine their child’s path.

Comments Policy

The views expressed in these posts are those of the bloggers and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any institution. The goal of this blog is to create an open discussion about education reform (most notably parental choice) in Oklahoma. All feedback is welcome as long as it includes the commenter's name and doesn't violate the common rules of netiquette.